Single Comment

As I said before, I'd prefer you leave the game as it is.  The option I
mentioned is merely the closest to an analogous diagonal that I've found,
but it is impossible to create a true ranging diagonal move on a triangular
board.  I feel that what you've done is the best for the game, despite
some side effects.  One way or another, you will have to sacrifice some
aspect of a pure FIDE chess move when translating to triangular cells. 
Let's take a look at your rook move for an example.  It is the standard
concept for orthogonal moves on triangles.  However, if we were to get
technical, it's not truly an orthogonally straight line.  The rook
leaving its starting cell intersects the border of the adjacent cell at a
perpendicular angle, just like in in FIDE chess.  But if it wants to
continue intersecting at perpendicular angles, it has to change
directions.  It really is creating a sort of zigzag.  Or you could say
that it is indeed going in a straight line, but then the rook isn't
intersecting borders at perpendicular angles as in FIDE chess.  I'm not
sure if I'm being clear--I've wanted to create a page describing
triangular moves for some time; it sure would help.  My point is that
something has to be sacrificed in the translation process, but that's
quite ok.

Hexagonal boards make a little sacrifice (diagonals are not truly
adjacent), but they still translate orthogonal moves very nicely.  It's
far harder with triangular boards.  Some aspect of square boards has to
go.  If it's a loss of literal orthogonals or diagonals, or if bishops
change square colors, that's ok.  As long as much of the original
character is preserved, and the analogous moves can be easily visualized,
I don't mind.  That's why I praise your game.  It looks like FIDE chess,
it feels like FIDE chess.  If one tries too hard to translate the moves too
literally, I feel that the end result is a poor game.

So back to my original thought, I think you have the best triangular chess
game around.  I really mean it :)